Who's read the bylaws, and the op-manual conduct standards?

Again, I've always thought any savvy BMW franchise GM or Owner would automatically include a one year member ship in the Club with the purchase or a new or CPO-ed BMW. To me that's good business at minimal cost to him/her.

It's not BMW popping for the dues, since the money is actually coming from the pockets of the owners, NOT BMW. After all, it's the owners who are buying the cars. Sure, it's BMW that provides the cars, but it's the club that provides the camraderie, the atmosphere, and social support. Why buy just a status symbol when you can buy a way of life as well?

My idea wasn't just another source of income, but streamlining the membership process for new owners.

Also, I'm not sure why BMW would bother duplicating the efforts of the BMW CCA just for its own sake when the hard work has already been done here.

You're really asking the dealership to pay the dues, not BMW, and not the new owners. And in a sense you're asking the salesperson to pay for much of it. It costs more to fill the tank on a BMW today than it does to join the Club. In the past renewal rates from members comped by their dealers made their chapters' renewal rates the worst in the Club. It's money thrown away and it's not BMW's money.

You do realize, right, that many BMW salespeople only make $100 when they sell a BMW? I'm not lying. The public wants BMWs at WalMart prices and the dealers take their "nut" off the top and end up paying the sales person a $100 minimum at some stores. That means the actual commission could be less than $100 at the level of the sales compensation as a percentage of the profit the dealer books. Most 3-series cars are sold at major dealerships below a minimum profit level. Those BMW lease and finance offers in their ads take usually $1800 of the dealer profit to meet the BMW NA quoted "deal". The dealership has to make their numbers, the customer has to match Edumund's invoice price, and the salesperson on a 15-20% commission-plan won't make $100 unless he's got a "minimum" backup. Now you want the dealer to give up half of that to every new customer, most of whom don't give a rat's a.s.s. about a club, Roundel magazine, or really driving their new BMW. That's the reality.

So what does this display of altered reality in this thread really have to do with the original question? How'd we get from mandated civility to free memberships? Why not just have BMW give everyone a BMW? That makes about as much sense. Let's round up even more people that don't care and don't know what they're talking about! If they're buying a BMW only as a status symbol, why would we want them as members?

The problem with this Club is it acts less like a club every year. It's not that it doesn't have enough members, it's that it doesn't have enough members who care. Don't compare BMW CCA growth to BMW NA's growth, compare our shrinking membership to the shrinking percentage of manual-transmission BMWs being sold. That's probably a more meaningful metric. A 10,000-member Club of enthusiasts is far preferable to a 70,000-member Club of whiners and complainers. Free memberships give nothing back to the chapters in terms of active members, or even money. Every proposal from the board to offer free memberships to any subset of owners was developed around screwing the chapters out of their share of the dues. That's probably in the current CPO free-membership proposal you won't read about in the board minutes (what's up with that?).

Sorry for the reality check. I now return you to the altered reality of the BMW CCA forum.

The problem with this Club is it acts less like a club every year. It's not that it doesn't have enough members, it's that it doesn't have enough members who care. Don't compare BMW CCA growth to BMW NA's growth, compare our shrinking membership to the shrinking percentage of manual-transmission BMWs being sold. That's probably a more meaningful metric. A 10,000-member Club of enthusiasts is far preferable to a 70,000-member Club of whiners and complainers. Free memberships give nothing back to the chapters in terms of active members, or even money. Every proposal from the board to offer free memberships to any subset of owners was developed around screwing the chapters out of their share of the dues. That's probably in the current CPO free-membership proposal you won't read about in the board minutes (what's up with that?).

.

All I can say is this....

If you are indeed correct about the relationship between membership numbers and manual transmission numbers, either BMWCCA is going to be forced to figure out a different method to attract desirable new members as well as retain desirable existing members, and energize that membership, or its going to die.

Its pretty clear that the "potential" membership base is evolving into one that is less of a motor-head and more of an "upscale luxury class" car owner. And, as BMW's increase in their levels of complexity, that trend is going to continue.

As in every other market or business, the catch-phrase is "evolve or die".

If you are indeed correct about the relationship between membership numbers and manual transmission numbers, either BMWCCA is going to be forced to figure out a different method to attract desirable new members as well as retain desirable existing members, and energize that membership, or its going to die.

Its pretty clear that the "potential" membership base is evolving into one that is less of a motor-head and more of an "upscale luxury class" car owner. And, as BMW's increase in their levels of complexity, that trend is going to continue.

As in every other market or business, the catch-phrase is "evolve or die".

Well, it was intended as provocative hyperbole.

Luxury upscale car owners don't need a club, they have their gold cards. But our Club has evolved and now offers what every upscale-luxury-car owner wants; roadside assistance! We're now just like any other auto club, credit card, or motorist organization with less to do with BMW and more to do with providing a service that is indistinguishable from any generic non-marque-related motoring club.

The Club's purpose is to serve the membership. If the membership is to be anyone interested in BMW and it is determined that they want AAA-type benefits and discounts on new cars, then it's not a club that the traditional BMWCCA member really needs any longer, is it? They can get those benefits anywhere; AAA, Costco, USAA, etc.

Rather than "evolve or die", this Club should insist on "serving the BMW enthusiast" or dissolve and not stress over lost advertising income and shrinking membership.

Your post(s) have brought up good points. I wonder if we will get any sort of feedback from CCA Officers?

Maybe, but I think we're smart enough to figure it out for ourselves. It's pretty self-explanatory -

"Simply put-treat others with the respect and consideration with which you would like to be treated.

ÃƒÆ’Ã†â€™Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â¢ÃƒÆ’Ã‚Â¢ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã…Â¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â¬ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â¢ All members will treat each other with common courtesy."

For the message forums here, I'd interpret that as meaning: When responding to a post, is my response what I would appreciate it being if I were the originator of the message?

And, when starting a thread, is the message something the rest of the community (more or less) is likely to want to read/hear/see?

Of course, the basic 'golden-rule' premise of "treat others as you would like to be treated" always needs a qualification such as 'with common courtesy' (and/or respect), due to the possibility of differing interpretations. A sado-masochist would have an entirely different set of behavioral standards for treating others and how they would want to be treated, for instance.

I agree there needs to be a balance though, and I have already decided how I am going to handle threadjackers from now on (I'll lock my thread every time, if the mods don't beat me to it).

bcweir][B]If you think free speech only applies to those who agree with you, wear a helmet before reading my posts. I DO hug trees! Deal with it![/B][/quote]

Bri, your sig tagline implies an advocacy of free speech. Do you not see an inherent inconsistency with that in your stated position on how you intend to handle thread hijacking? Obviously you can attempt to 'handle' threads you initiate however you wish, but you might keep in mind that tolerance is a two-way street, and if you opt to lock or delete every thread that you decide for yourself isn't going how you want it, you stand a chance of being perceived as intolerant and/or humorless. Furthermore, as far as that goes as a standard of conduct, is that how [u][b]you[/u][/b] would like to be treated? Anybody on the forum making a snap judgment that a reply you post isn't relevant (regardless of whether it is or isn't) and reacting by locking the thread or deleting it?

Don't ya think that would tend to be a disincentive for discourse? Productive and/or entertaining interaction is only going to come from people feeling free to communicate...

I'm reminded of the Iraqi man sitting on the bus and having another man who's riding standing on the sitting mans foot.....

Again, I've always thought any savvy BMW franchise GM or Owner would automatically include a one year member ship in the Club with the purchase or a new or CPO-ed BMW. To me that's good business at minimal cost to him/her.

Only if the dealer feels the club somehow is of some benefit to them.

I don't know if it's still the case that new BMW's also include a club membership brochure, but I remember at one time that was a big deal for the club to have been able to negotiate w/ BMW NA to do that much. I wonder if we ever gained much from it.

Luxury upscale car owners don't need a club, they have their gold cards. But our Club has evolved and now offers what every upscale-luxury-car owner wants; roadside assistance! We're now just like any other auto club, credit card, or motorist organization with less to do with BMW and more to do with providing a service that is indistinguishable from any generic non-marque-related motoring club.

The Club's purpose is to serve the membership. If the membership is to be anyone interested in BMW and it is determined that they want AAA-type benefits and discounts on new cars, then it's not a club that the traditional BMWCCA member really needs any longer, is it? They can get those benefits anywhere; AAA, Costco, USAA, etc.

I think it can be argued the club does, and will continue, to serve BMW enthusiasts, even if there has been some generic-ization due to common-to-other-groups offerings being added to the mix. As a BMW-specific resource, between the people, Roundel advertisers, Roundel itself, and club activities, the only other organization capable of doing something similar is BMW itself. And, they can't offer what the club offers on a similar scale, and, for pay-for events, remotely-close price-points - plus, BMW's primary focus is their current product line. I suspect the club offers much more to owners of prior models in all kinds of ways. I think those are some of the unique aspects for the club that will always have appeal.

Bri, your sig tagline implies an advocacy of free speech. Do you not see an inherent inconsistency with that in your stated position on how you intend to handle thread hijacking? Obviously you can attempt to 'handle' threads you initiate however you wish, but you might keep in mind that tolerance is a two-way street, and if you opt to lock or delete every thread that you decide for yourself isn't going how you want it, you stand a chance of being perceived as intolerant and/or humorless. Furthermore, as far as that goes as a standard of conduct, is that how you would like to be treated? Anybody on the forum making a snap judgment that a reply you post isn't relevant (regardless of whether it is or isn't) and reacting by locking the thread or deleting it?

The fact that the mods locked my thread before I did, pretty plainly tells me that the thread had obviously gotten way out of hand. Personally, if you're going to defend someone's "right" to derail a thread with OT subject matter, then you can't argue against the thread originator's "right" to lock the thread before the mods do without finding yourself defending the bullying that jacked the thread in the first place.

Free speech comes with certain responsibilities, otherwise it's just a meaningless shouting match. I don't consider yelling "fire" in a crowded theater where no such emergency exists to be "free speech" anymore than the sometimes toxic political atmosphere licenses someone to gun down six people, including a 9 year old child. The problem is where do you draw the line? As recently as yesterday I'm still being harassed (and I use that word most conservatively, because I have said no to "flames" on my car's clean white paint MULTIPLE times [do a search if you want to find the exact number, because I rather spare myself the agitation of finding out], and I am still being bullied about it). What started out as a "harmless joke" has become the harassment that as of yesterday, refuses to die. Even joking about vandalizing a member's automobile with unwanted paint (flames or otherwise) ought to be a line never crossed in an automotive forum. If I sound like I am taking it too seriously, let me ask you this -- if I spoke of putting a mallet in the middle of another member's windshield PERSISTENTLY, even after being told no by that car's owner, under the category of satire or 'harmless teasing' would that be protected free speech too?

How do you stop members from bullying other members? Are you going to use the 1st amendment as a shield to protect disrespectful behavior? Are you going to use the 1st amendment to allow someone to basically derail an automotive related thread into something completely unrelated to the topic of the original thread? Are you going to use the 1st amendment to protect someone who wants to inject divisive personal politics to further poison the forum climate? Is spamming and posting identical posts to multiple BMW CCA forums protected free speech as well?

There's really only two sides you can take on "free speech." You can either choose free speech with reasonable limits that promotes peaceful, open sharing of ideas and treats everyone with respect, or you can use the 1st amendment in an unlimited reckless fashion as a shield to promote chaos and step on anyone you choose to, just because you can..

Time to start choosing sides.

Please check out my new science fiction adventure story now online at http://www.xybears.com. Your help and support with this would be greatly appreciated! Thank you!

Free speech comes with certain responsibilities, otherwise it's just a meaningless shouting match. I don't consider yelling "fire" in a crowded theater where no such emergency exists to be "free speech"....

...The problem is where do you draw the line?

...or you can use the 1st amendment in an unlimited reckless fashion as a shield to promote chaos and step on anyone you choose to, just because you can..

Not exactly, because the Supreme Court has drawn the line for us by defining protected free speech in prior cases - specifically Brandenburg v. Ohio; "which limited the scope of banned speech to that which would be directed to and likely to incite imminent lawless action (e.g. a riot)."

It would be a stretch (a really, really big stretch), to suggest that anyone's reply to another's initial post on these message forums, in almost all cases, is likely to incite a riot, or "imminent lawless action".

Are you going to use the 1st amendment to allow someone to basically derail an automotive related thread into something completely unrelated to the topic of the original thread? Are you going to use the 1st amendment to protect someone who wants to inject divisive personal politics to further poison the forum climate? Is spamming and posting identical posts to multiple BMW CCA forums protected free speech as well?

Well, going by the Supreme Court's definition, since none of those are likely to incite a riot, I'd say... pretty much, yeah.

...if you're going to defend someone's "right" to derail a thread with OT subject matter, then you can't argue against the thread originator's "right" to lock the thread...

I wasn't - as I pointed out, you (and anyone else) obviously is free to lock a thread, at least as long as that feature of the forums remains enabled.

However, the point was not about just locking a particular thread, but rather addressing how you may find folks reacting to or perceiving your apparent intention to act as overlord judge & jury over any thread you initiate. You seem to be suggesting that anything off-topic that you don't want to hear or don't like is somehow bullying and harassment, even when it's obvious the spirit of what's posted is meant, at most, as a joke. Do you seriously think the few of us around here actively posting have the desire or intent to bully and harass YOU? And if that actually were the case, don't you think it would come across as something far more mean-spirited and blatant than the joking suggestion of throwing some flames on the hood of your car that everyone already knows you're not gonna do anyway?

Might be helpful to keep Psych 101 in mind - don't encourage behavior you don't like by reacting to it. I'd suggest, if someone throws up some post you don't like, ignore it. (maybe even this one! ) Or, consider that you choose how to perceive anything; if you find something agitating, remember that you can also choose to not allow it to bother you.

Setting the 'free speech' issue aside, first there's defining 'spamming' - do you not discern a difference between someone who is, at a minimum, definitely new to these forums (and possibly have never posted any message on any internet forum anywhere before, ever), and doesn't know any better, (because they don't know how the forums work), to not post their message in two different forum topics, and someone who is actually spamming the forums by posting an advertisement in every forum topic? What response does each deserve? Should the innocent noob be criticized and reprimanded for their ignorance, or welcomed to the club and kindly informed as to message forum protocols? The commercial mass-spammer, on the other hand, should be banned for their flagrant abuse, ya? So, what's spamming? Is it double-posting? It's a matter of how you define it, and choose to perceive it, balanced with a reality check of how it's commonly perceived and defined. Even if you find double-posting from a first-timer annoying, isn't that forgivable, and are you not free to choose to not make a federal case out of it for yourself? As opposed to what most would more typically define as spamming?

Even joking about vandalizing a member's automobile with unwanted paint (flames or otherwise) ought to be a line never crossed in an automotive forum. If I sound like I am taking it too seriously, let me ask you this -- if I spoke of putting a mallet in the middle of another member's windshield PERSISTENTLY, even after being told no by that car's owner, under the category of satire or 'harmless teasing' would that be protected free speech too?

You're over-dramatizing, and yes, you're taking things too seriously - waaay too seriously. There's a difference between personal action by an individual, and suggestion of action TO an individual, by another (particularly when the suggestion is not serious, is just kidding, or a joke). Nobody's been talking about 'vandalizing' anything, that's just how you seem to be characterizing it. Let us know if someday someone puts flames on your car in the middle of the night... preposterous, right? Someone seriously saying THEY intend to smash YOUR car, for instance, would be an actual threat. I think it's obvious from the club standards, that actual threats would be unacceptable conduct between members. However, nobody's threatening you, particularly with hood-flame decals or paint.

Are you going to use the 1st amendment as a shield to protect disrespectful behavior?

Is speech behavior? Hmm... I guess it can be... In the context of the club, however, I think disrespect is pretty much addressed by the 'golden-rule' premise. Is posting something off-topic disrespectful? Maybe, maybe not - depends on what it is, what's said, or how it's said, I suppose. If the standard is treating others as one would like to be treated, then OT-ing (off-topic-ing, as it were) is going to be a judgment call, although as we've seen (countless times, at that), it is the rare instance indeed where anyone expresses much consternation over the conversational meanderings of a thread. It would seem that, by and large, almost all around here accept and/or engage in OT-ing as a matter of course, based on prior experience.

On second thought, skip the disclaimer - it'll be more entertaining to see people's reactions.... for a while, anyway.

I'm reminded of the joke about a passer-by finding a man repeatedly hitting his head with a hammer... he asks him "Why do you keep doing that??" and the man with the hammer says... "Because... it feels so good when I stop!"

Meandering is fun. Well stated arguments over free speech rights aside, I would put fortht he argument that the OT forum is intended for entertaining discourse...moreso that the other forums in this place.

Going way OT in the E90 forum when someone asks about an exhaust problem is probably not such a great thing.

Going OT in the OT forum? Seems right at home. Not done disrespectfully, but it's a great place to add some color to an otherwise bland, boring, lifeless, dull and unexciting (white, in other words) existence.

Not standing up to bullies (i.e. passively ignoring it) doesn't work - it just continues to enable the behavior because said individuals then view you as a "pushover" or a "doormat." Trust me, I'm neither.

To each their own. I'm going to lock my threads when I see them getting hijacked, and I will report abusive chatters from here on in.

The "honeymoon" is over. I'm no longer going to look the other way.

You've been warned.

I am now unsubscribing from this thread.

Please check out my new science fiction adventure story now online at http://www.xybears.com. Your help and support with this would be greatly appreciated! Thank you!

Not standing up to bullies (i.e. passively ignoring it) doesn't work - it just continues to enable the behavior because said individuals then view you as a "pushover" or a "doormat." Trust me, I'm neither.

To each their own. I'm going to lock my threads when I see them getting hijacked, and I will report abusive chatters from here on in.

The "honeymoon" is over. I'm no longer going to look the other way.

You've been warned.

I am now unsubscribing from this thread.

I didn't necessarily expect you to agree, and of course you have the right not to.

I can't disagree that not standing up for oneself doesn't necessarily solve, or resolve, anything. But, what about a realistic appraisal of what is actual bullying, at least in the relatively artificial context of internet message forums?

A thread going off-topic = bullying? Really?? Even if that's how you feel about it, can you see how others might have an entirely different viewpoint and perception? Sheesh, I can't imagine how ridiculous things would get around here if everyone opted to be extremely thin-skinned and over-sensitive. Thankfully most of the conversations center around something BMW-related!

Indeed, to each their own, but it sounds like you might be taking things far more personally than they're ever meant to be, particularly around here.

This bit about flame decorations.... It's your car and you're going to do whatever you want to it (or not), regardless of what anyone else says or does, here or anywhere else, right? So then why does it matter whether someone suggests something you do or don't want for your car, whether you like the suggestion, or not? Someone suggesting something you don't want for your car hardly constitutes bullying, even if variations of the suggestion are repeated several times.

Have you considered that locking and deleting threads could potentially be interpreted as bully-ish?

With that and all in the prior post being said, it's still inconsistent to suggest advocacy of (legally defined) free speech but be willing to attempt to constrain or control it according to one's own preferences. Since you never answered whether it's ok by you to be treated exactly as you're proposing, should we assume you're ok with anyone locking or deleting any thread you post in for, well, either any reason, or none at all? Or are you going to suggest that's bullying and harassment, except when you do it? Double-standards blow credibility right out the window....

Not standing up to bullies (i.e. passively ignoring it) doesn't work - it just continues to enable the behavior because said individuals then view you as a "pushover" or a "doormat." Trust me, I'm neither.

To each their own. I'm going to lock my threads when I see them getting hijacked, and I will report abusive chatters from here on in.

The "honeymoon" is over. I'm no longer going to look the other way.

You've been warned.

Brian,

I don't know you and you don't know me. I know you only by your behavior here, and you're way out there in taking everything the wrong way. Seriously, I don't think you've shown that you can handle a public forum. Quit before you hurt yourself.

Since the behavior here has become so infantile, allow me to put it in words you might be able to comprehend: I think it's time you took your ball and went home.

I don't know you and you don't know me. I know you only by your behavior here, and you're way out there in taking everything the wrong way. Seriously, I don't think you've shown that you can handle a public forum. Quit before you hurt yourself.

Since the behavior here has become so infantile, allow me to put it in words you might be able to comprehend: I think it's time you took your ball and went home.

Don't let the door . . . you know!

All of this back-and-forth reminds me of something my grandfather told me a long time ago, when I was a kid...

You simply have to use people up as they are, not as you would have them be...

I didn't necessarily expect you to agree, and of course you have the right not to.

I can't disagree that not standing up for oneself doesn't necessarily solve, or resolve, anything. But, what about a realistic appraisal of what is actual bullying, at least in the relatively artificial context of internet message forums?

A thread going off-topic = bullying? Really?? Even if that's how you feel about it, can you see how others might have an entirely different viewpoint and perception? Sheesh, I can't imagine how ridiculous things would get around here if everyone opted to be extremely thin-skinned and over-sensitive. Thankfully most of the conversations center around something BMW-related!

Indeed, to each their own, but it sounds like you might be taking things far more personally than they're ever meant to be, particularly around here.

This bit about flame decorations.... It's your car and you're going to do whatever you want to it (or not), regardless of what anyone else says or does, here or anywhere else, right? So then why does it matter whether someone suggests something you do or don't want for your car, whether you like the suggestion, or not? Someone suggesting something you don't want for your car hardly constitutes bullying, even if variations of the suggestion are repeated several times.

Have you considered that locking and deleting threads could potentially be interpreted as bully-ish?

With that and all in the prior post being said, it's still inconsistent to suggest advocacy of (legally defined) free speech but be willing to attempt to constrain or control it according to one's own preferences. Since you never answered whether it's ok by you to be treated exactly as you're proposing, should we assume you're ok with anyone locking or deleting any thread you post in for, well, either any reason, or none at all? Or are you going to suggest that's bullying and harassment, except when you do it? Double-standards blow credibility right out the window....

eek! Yo bro, don't be bullyin' me now, man!

As moosehead points out, this is _just_ the internet around here, and a micro-small subsection of it at that; no reason to take things so deathly serious - you'll find it a lot more fun if you don't.

Now back to our regularly scheduled lunacy..... or, more important things, like.. American Idol!

MGarrison thank you for the time and effort you put into this. I did not have the time or patience.

Everyone I apologize for the gasoline/nitrous mixture I threw on this fire.

My one comment is that these threads are conversations. Conversations naturally change directions, which means going off topic. Now I know for the sake of searching later, it is important to try and stay on topic, but it will never be perfect.

My one comment is that these threads are conversations. Conversations naturally change directions, which means going off topic. Now I know for the sake of searching later, it is important to try and stay on topic, but it will never be perfect.

Hey, what were we talking about again?

Oh, yeah: GHOST FLAMES!

Satch Carlson

"The first failure of communication is the belief that any is taking place."